The Role of RKBA in Deterring Islamic Violence and Tyranny

There’s an uncomfortable topic that many “liberty-minded” discussion groups studiously avoid when talking about Islam—not because it isn’t relevant, but because it terrifies them. The moment you bring it up, the Left is standing by with the pre-written accusation: Islamophobic extremist, possibly armed, definitely dangerous.

So the subject gets dodged.

That subject is the Right to Keep and Bear Arms—also known as the right to self-defense.

In the United States, that right isn’t some vague suggestion or hunting club perk. It’s explicitly protected by the Second Amendment:

“𝐴 𝑤𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑀𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎, 𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑛𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑘𝑒𝑒𝑝 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝐴𝑟𝑚𝑠, 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑏𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑑.”

And before anyone pretends that means “𝒐𝒏𝒍𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒈𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕,” the Supreme Court already settled that argument. DC v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010) affirmed what the plain text already said: this is an individual right of the people.

Under President Trump, and continued in many red states since, there has been a push toward Constitutional Carry—meaning you don’t need government permission to exercise a right you already have. My home state of Louisiana is now one of many that recognize this reality, much to the horror of Democrats and the taxpayer-disarmament lobby.

And no, I don’t call it “gun control.” Gun control is using both hands. What they’re advocating is taxpayer disarmament—selective, political, and usually enforced on the people least likely to abuse power.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗘𝘅𝗶𝘀𝘁𝘀 (𝗛𝗶𝗻𝘁: 𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝗡𝗼𝘁 𝗛𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴)

The Second Amendment serves three purposes. None of them involve deer season.

1. Defense of the United States

The U.S. has roughly 330 million people. Over 100 million of them are armed. There are more than 300 million privately owned firearms—enough to arm every adult in the country. Add roughly 14 million hunting licenses issued annually, and you have a population that is not exactly helpless.

For perspective: American hunters alone outnumber China’s active-duty military by about seven to one.

This isn’t an accident. Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, architect of Pearl Harbor, reportedly warned against invading the U.S. mainland because there would be “a rifle behind every blade of grass.”

Any foreign military planner knows the nightmare scenario isn’t just crossing an ocean—it’s facing an armed population after they get there. Anyone who thinks civilians can’t harass, sabotage, and bleed a modern military hasn’t been paying attention to Ukraine. Civilians don’t wear uniforms, don’t follow Geneva “suggestions,” and tend to get very creative when defending their homes.

2. A Check on Government Power

This is the part everyone pretends not to understand.

The Founders were explicit—especially in the Federalist Papers—that the vote, backed by an armed citizenry, was meant to prevent government from behaving like the British Crown did toward the colonies.

Even if you combined every federal, state, and local law enforcement officer with active and reserve military personnel, you’d get maybe 3.5 million people.

That’s versus over 100 million armed civilians.

History lesson: numbers matter. Ask General Custer how well things go when a smaller force assumes superior authority guarantees obedience.

3. The Natural Right of Self-Defense

At its core, the Second Amendment protects something older than the Constitution: the inherent right to defend your life, liberty, and property against the initiation of force.

Rights don’t enforce themselves. They never have. Every civilization that forgot that lesson paid for it.

𝗦𝗼 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗗𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗗𝗼 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗜𝘀𝗹𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗧𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗺?

Quite a lot, actually.

Look at mass-casualty attacks in the West. San Bernardino (2015). Orlando’s Pulse Nightclub (2016). Even recent attacks overseas, like Bondi Beach in Australia. A recurring theme appears: attackers choose places where civilian resistance is minimal or prohibited.

San Bernardino and California still maintain strict taxpayer disarmament laws. Orlando did at the time of the Pulse attack—laws later rolled back under pro-RKBA leadership.

Meanwhile, defensive gun uses in the U.S. happen far more often than the media admits. Estimates suggest crimes are interrupted every few minutes simply by a would-be victim displaying a firearm. Most of these incidents never make the news, because “nothing happened” doesn’t sell outrage.

Here’s the irony the disarmament crowd hates: when violence occurs, their solution is always the same—call someone with a gun. Preferably faster than the attacker.

So ask yourself: what happens when an attacker knows that the moment he announces his intentions, half the room might be armed, and high velocity metal poisoning is likely?

Predators prefer victims. Not resistance.

Historically, Islamic expansion stalled whenever it encountered organized, armed opposition. The Spanish Reconquista of the 1400, culminating with the Battle of Vienna in 1683. When resistance was strong and sustained, imperial Islamic expansion stopped. When populations were disarmed, subjugation followed.

This isn’t complicated.

You cannot dominate people who can fight back.

And that—whether the Left likes it or not—is exactly why the right to keep and bear arms remains one of the most effective deterrents against the tyranny of Islamic terror, and anyone else who believes force is a one-way street.

Liberty survives where people refuse to outsource their survival.

15 comments